Bombay High Court holds that a party cannot withhold payments under a contract merely due to pending criminal proceedings without filing a formal claim for recovery.
Bombay High Court holds that contractual audit rights under service agreements survive termination and permit interim measures for forensic inspection in data breach cases.
The Kerala High Court dismisses a review petition for attempting to re-litigate costs imposed for filing frivolous Section 8 petitions, reinforcing procedural discipline in litigation.
Supreme Court holds that arbitration cannot proceed when the agreement itself is alleged to be forged, affirming that consent is the bedrock of arbitral jurisdiction.
Bombay High Court holds that selecting Mumbai from a list of four cities in a loan agreement constitutes an agreed seat, conferring exclusive jurisdiction for arbitration.
Chhattisgarh High Court mandates arbitration authorities to decide pending land acquisition compensation claims within four months, reinforcing statutory timelines under the Arbitration Act.
Delhi High Court sets aside arbitral award for failing to explain denial of interest and costs, affirming that unreasoned awards conflict with public policy under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act.
Madras High Court condones 231-day delay in filing Section 34 petition under Arbitration Act, emphasizing commercial litigation standards and conditional relief.
Bombay High Court holds that parties cannot invoke no-escalation clauses to avoid liability when their own breach causes delay and additional costs to the contractor.
Bombay High Court holds that parties cannot invoke no-escalation clauses to avoid liability when their own breach causes delay and additional costs to the contractor.
Supreme Court holds that only the Principal Civil Court or High Court with ordinary original jurisdiction can extend arbitral timelines under Section 29A, regardless of who appointed the arbitrator.
Delhi High Court clarifies that mere arbitration venue does not confer jurisdiction; seat must be agreed or determined. Section 42 vests exclusive control in court first approached where cause of action arises.
Chhattisgarh High Court holds that mutual consent of parties to appoint a retired judge as sole arbitrator supersedes procedural defaults under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration Act.
Madras High Court holds that at Section 11 stage, courts must only verify existence of a valid arbitration agreement-factual disputes are for the arbitrator to decide.
Chhattisgarh High Court upholds enforceability of arbitration clause despite prior stay on termination, affirming party autonomy and procedural compliance under the Arbitration Act.